- Status
This, exactly.
that is your choice, please allow others to make their own.
if someone wants to switch modes expecting them to start from scratch is a bit much, especially when we currently only have one save. even when we get more slots there will be limits and i for one want to use one for deep space exploration, another for general use and a third for guests to play around on. as such all my save slots will already be in use so will you also suggest i'm forced to buy another copy of the game in order to comply with your wishes? will you buy it for me if that is the case?
Well you already have several save slots planned out so one more wouldn't make any difference. Ok so you disagree with me, fair enough. Let's look at other options then? Maybe that you can't switch from open to solo at certain points like during combat or when it is an advantageous advantage to you over other players? That option is flawed by crashing your own game to do it.
I have no problem with my personal choice, yours or anyone else's. This is an open forum and you have every right to voice an opinion. I don't see in my post that I stated otherwise.
Each of us play differently, if my solution is not right for you then I welcome your opinion and choice with open arms in the hope of one day resolving this issue.
Dave.
I'm afraid you've misread or misunderstood the post you're quoting.
Point 1 is specifically (and only) about factions expanding into unsettled space. It has nothing to do with 'flipping' the faction that controls a station (or through that, flipping the faction that controls a system).
Point 2 is clarifying that the background simulation cannot (at least at the moment) add new stations to an already settled system. It has nothing to do with whether you can flip a station or system.
Point 3 is clarifying that the background simulation cannot (at least at the moment) upgrade a station (ie, an outpost becoming a full station, or a station that didn't have a market gaining one). It has nothing to do with whether you can flip a station or system.
None of these points has anything to do with flipping an existing station or inhabited system. Station and system flipping are automated and do not require manual input from the devs. There are a couple of bugs that have come to light that the devs are currently working to fix, which are interfering with this automated process.
Last edited:
The same exact model is working fine for GTAV, with solo, group and open (GTAV calls group 'friends' but its the same) and I suspect it will work fine with Elite Dangerous.
First, if you want to play Solo, that's absolutely cool and fine with me, and I completely support your decision to play the way you want to play.
With that said...
If you don't want to deal with random attacks, it's extremely easy - just stay away from the core systems and the places that sell rare goods. A little bit closer to the 'frontier' of human space, I still see a fair number of players, but I've never had trouble with any of them.
With that said...
...When I see stuff like this I have to wonder if I'm playing the same game. Have you actually played in Open for any length of time? I've played nothing but Open since launch, and you know how many times I've been attacked by another player, let alone 'killed for no reason'? None. Not once. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
If you don't want to deal with random attacks, it's extremely easy - just stay away from the core systems and the places that sell rare goods. A little bit closer to the 'frontier' of human space, I still see a fair number of players, but I've never had trouble with any of them.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
The issue is tho, for those who are happy with it, there is NO issue, and any "solution" can only make it worse - for us who are happy as it is so the happy ones can only lose. Also it will go against the product as advertised that we bought.
I sympathise that some do not like it, but imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, and the game had no switching, and was advertised as, the ultimate competitive player vs player game, and it launched and you were happy with it, and then a big group of people like me came in and said...
naaaah I dont like it, I want too be able to swap in and out at will......
I would be laughed at and told to go suck an egg....and how would the community react if then this feature was added in
/
The point is, you will never ever please everyone, so at some point in the designing stage people have to decide who they are going to please and then go with it. The worst thing FD could do is advertise 1 thing and then deliver another... esp when a certain section already feel FD has already done exactly that, but the argument there is apparently solo offline was not technically feasible.... that excuse does not fly here.
To be honest I dont even know why i get so invested in this thread...... I guess it is because for 30 years this has been for me personally my greatest game of all time and has eaten (wasted) a lot of my gaming life. I admit I am a bit of a fanboy
, logically tho i know it isnt going to change............................................... is there a way i can ban myself from posting in a thread?
Last edited:
I'll just throw in my vote that I don't think Solo should exist. At the very least the ships on Solo and Open should be on separate hives.
Why should I? Why should I have to stay away from core systems when in open play? The game is about exploration, adventure, going further than you have gone before. Why should I let idiotic muppets spoil my enjoyment?
To answer your question I did around 20 hours in open play (not a lot I know) it was enough to make me think sod this! To be fair it was just after ED launch so I was intrigued and there were a lot of new pilots testing their goodies. I may even give it another go but to be honest I have enough going on without having some snotty nosed teenager ramming my ship out of existence "because he can" I play to chill out and enjoy the beauty that the ED team have created. Not blow up foul mouthed imbeciles.
As to why you should have to stay away from core systems in open play, you don't 'have' to at all. But if you choose to travel to areas that have high player traffic when playing in a open PvP environment like Open mode, you are dramatically increasing your risk of being attacked by another player.
As to why you should let 'idiotic muppets' spoil your enjoyment, you shouldn't. If you find player attacks annoying and you're happy in Solo, that's cool.
I just see so many posts on these boards giving the impression that Open mode is some kind of nightmarish hell where you can't move without tripping over dozens of psychopaths dedicated to your destruction, when that really is not the case.
As I said, that's perfectly cool with me. I play Open because I enjoy the added risk and unpredictability of having other players around - I'd get very bored very quickly in Solo mode. But that's why I support the current setup and see no reason to change it - we can both play the way we want to play, and if we change our minds, we can change our mode.
I have played many games in the past which includes PVP type games - to be honest I am not good at PVP well ok I guess but Don't get me wrong I am not against PVP I know some people enjoy this - but ED Has a fresh breath of air game mode called SOLO which I and many others I am sure enjoy playing - saying that I would like to meet up with fellow commanders maybe in Group play not tried that yet - one day I may try open play but if I do I will expect to be Jumped on and burned to hell PVP style which I will be prepared for with a well kitted ship but not sure this is what I want?
It really is each to their own isn't it in this. It is a sorry subject to have to discuss but it does need to be discussed. I certainly don't want to take anything away from anyone. I just try to think of solutions. For me, solo play is great, for others, not so great. If someone turned round to me and said solo play is being taken away because the open players don't think it works I would be the first on here ranting or vice versa. The simple fact that we are all overlooking is the fact that the game WAS released early, people got bored VERY quickly and the game suffered for it.
I just can't wait for the updates. This has so much potential and I really hope that the DEVS that read these threads don't get too disheartened.
The issue is tho, for those who are happy with it, there is NO issue, and any "solution" can only make it worse - for us who are happy as it is so the happy ones can only lose. Also it will go against the product as advertised that we bought.
I sympathise that some do not like it, but imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, and the game had no switching, and was advertised as, the ultimate competitive player vs player game, and it launched and you were happy with it, and then a big group of people like me came in and said...
naaaah I dont like it, I want too be able to swap in and out at will......
I would be laughed at and told to go suck an egg....and how would the community react if then this feature was added in
/
The point is, you will never ever please everyone, so at some point in the designing stage people have to decide who they are going to please and then go with it. The worst thing FD could do is advertise 1 thing and then deliver another... esp when a certain section already feel FD has already done exactly that, but the argument there is apparently solo offline was not technically feasible.... that excuse does not fly here.
To be honest I dont even know why i get so invested in this thread...... I guess it is because for 30 years this has been for me personally my greatest game of all time and has eaten (wasted) a lot of my gaming life. I admit I am a bit of a fanboy
+1 for me on this. There isn't realistically anything that can be done.
Now stop posting!!!!
Would you prefer the removal of Solo to its segregation from Open?
Yes yes, I agree, but plenty of people dont, so therefore they have the right to enquire respectfully and have it discussed in forums (respectfully).
Because its in their nature, playstyle and agenda not to. The very essence of PvP requires the other 'P' to participate, which is something 'they' want to do by force if they can convince FD.
Ok the answer is 'Yes', but you may not be satisfied by my answer, and I really cant be ..er.. stuffed explaining it in full detail because I too dont agree with them. But I'll give it a shot..
* The ONLY thing I have heard of or can think of that DOES affect the game of 'open' players due to 'solo/group' players is THE ECONOMY. The 'background simulation' shares trade data and statisitics amongst all games 'modes'. (Although I'm told there is no 'mode', just one universe with 3 'matchmaking' options.) So by buying and selling goods in solo/group mode you do actually affect the prices and demands of goods in open mode.
Got it? cool. Yes, it does affect them. Yes, its marginal and minor (imho) but a big enough issue to them to mention it. (or a cunning ruse to cover the hidden agenda of just having more targets to kill). So, 'YES' is the answer you seek. 'HOW MUCH' is a better question to ask, and the answer is most likely to be 'VERY LITTLE' from almost everyone, except the over zealous PvP audience.
It is important to remember that there are plenty of lovely people playing in open play who are not focused on PvP, but they will participate if it comes their way. Those people are just happily playing and dont see what all the fuss is about, and they are being mis-represented by and PvP-focused minority who are intent on changing the game so everyone is in open, or that open players receive some sort of bonus. Dont tar all open players with one brush, its the PvP-focused lobby that are more intent on changing the play style of solo/group players.
They are making a complaint, just not specifically aimed at you, just more broadly aimed at solo/group players.
Solo/group players on the other hand, just dont care about the plight of the PvP-focused lobby, they are too busy enjoying themselves and playing the game the way they want to. Good for them, they pay, they play, they smile, they recommend. Good for the business model, good for the community, and alot less work for the mods.
Hope you like my insight, you are of course welcome to disagree, I really dont mind. But the trading thing is real, and does affect them .. even if its just a little..
Last edited:
I don't think they will, the thread was started by a Moderator (with rules), the way I read it is the mods (or devs maybe) have said "Enough of this already, a new post every other day on the same non issue, or a new poll about this corrosive non issue, lets put it all in one place, it will be easier to manage" for the over worked, not paid forum mods .
The many DDF / dev diary quotes (and the fact we are post launch with these "features" (not cheats) still in place, and people still think they can change the game to provide them with more prey, without (it would seem) considering:
1. the size of the game, a few jumps and you wont see many CMDR's
2. 32 player max instancing (no you will not get to own a sector or space station or blockade one)
3. There might be a problem with their:
3.a Router
3.b ISP
3.c antivirus
3.d Wife (ok joke)
It is better they merge all new threads on this topic into this "black hole" and keep it open, when the people who didn't research what they were buying, realise that FD are not going to change their vision just for them, the thread will be a lot less active.
Talk to EA. They just lost one over their soccer game.
Kickstarters are a different deal. The backers are technically investors, and have much wider avenues of recompense. EA, settled it's stockholder led class action suit over Battlefield 4. Don't kid yourself that it doesn't happen.
If it makes you feel any better I know for sure of at least 2 people that have been tagged with the 7 day ban for their comments in here, so its happening. Some of us are just really good at walking the line.
Only 2 ish ?, I expected more after the OP
.I am sure I have seen that more than twice, and by a lot more than 2 players, being someone who started off in PB (6 months ago) and has played all "modes" I don't take offence to it, even when it comes from people who state "I have never played in solo or private group, but you all need to play in open because that's the way I want he game to work"
It is also possible the Mods are handing out the 7 day holiday to people using the "easy mode" phrase, that could also be why the signal to noise ratio is improving here.
Let's understand the benefit of allowing players to switch between single player mode and open play mode.
For those who prefers switching at will:
- Less risk being attacked by a human pirate, trading at lesser risk.
- Trading with lesser risk means progressing into the game faster
For those who play only on Open Play mode:
- No benefit at all
Conclusion - Unfair advantage over those who play only on Open Play Mode
Do you see this as being balanced if a certain feature creates a unfair advantage to a certain group of players?
In my view, a certain group is certainly gaining more advantage over the other which means that this upsets the balance of the game which needs to be fixed.
In my opinion it would be best to seperate Single Player mode and Open Play mode. Whatever you get (CR, progression, etc) in Single Player mode SHOULD stay in Single Player Mode. Open Play needs to have a separate shard.
For those who prefers switching at will:
- Less risk being attacked by a human pirate, trading at lesser risk.
- Trading with lesser risk means progressing into the game faster
For those who play only on Open Play mode:
- No benefit at all
Conclusion - Unfair advantage over those who play only on Open Play Mode
Do you see this as being balanced if a certain feature creates a unfair advantage to a certain group of players?
In my view, a certain group is certainly gaining more advantage over the other which means that this upsets the balance of the game which needs to be fixed.
In my opinion it would be best to seperate Single Player mode and Open Play mode. Whatever you get (CR, progression, etc) in Single Player mode SHOULD stay in Single Player Mode. Open Play needs to have a separate shard.
Last edited:
- Status